If god does not exist is this true?
If god does not exist is this true?
If god does not exist then life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value. Also morality does not inherently exist, and that any established moral values are abstractly contrived.
- JDLv 59 years agoFavorite Answer
If God does not exist then morals have no value whatsoever, and are nothing more than a sick and pathetic way for the strong to impose their mental illness on the weak.
- TrulyLv 49 years ago
With or without the existence of god(s), life is just the process of living and being alive, and that kind of definition is the only meaning. All plants, animals, and other forms of "life" live and have lives until they die. Other than that the term "life" and phrase "meaning of life" to be attributed to humans for some type of greater meaning were just created by idiots who thought they were way more important than they really are in the scheme of things.
Morality would also be unaffected by the existence or non-existence of god(s), so the second half of the statement is false also.
If the existence of morality was based on the existence of god, and only existed if god existed, then wouldn't it have to be arbitrarily contrived by god? We'd be better off if it was abstractly contrived by humans, wouldn't we (or maybe about equal)? That is if either one was the case, of course.
- Anonymous9 years ago
There are 3 main assumptions in your questions.
1)That IF God Does exit then life for believers has meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value.
2)That morality without a God is impossible
3)That any non-theistic based morality is false & unnatural whereas a God based one is not.
2) Think about this. Paraphrasing Plato from the Euthypryo - Does God(s)s chose what is good because it is good, or is it good because God(s) chooses it? If the first option is true that shows that what is good is independent of God(s). Good just is good and that is why a good God(s) chooses it. But if the second option is true then the very idea of what is good simply depends on God(s): If God(s) decided torturing babies was good then it would be good. You can't reply by saying God(s) wouldn't chose that? Because he is good. Exactly. That would simply be reinforcing the first option that there are independent standards of good & bad, to which God(s) conforms. Torture is not wrong because God(s) says it is. Torture is wrong absolutely & we do not need God(s) to determine this. This argument can be generalized.
3) to follow.
- KiethLv 59 years ago
That depends doesn't it? When you say God are you referring to the concept of God? Are you operating from the idea that God exists outside of yourself perhaps sailing around on a cloud or a star? Or are you perhaps talking about the inherent intelligence of Life itself?
Perhaps you have a completely different idea of what and who God is...
What about the concept called morals? What are these concepts you are referring to? What do they mean to you? If you are thinking about taking action that contradicts your idea of right and wrong, what do you feel? Is there a part of you that wants to participate in the action and a part of you that says it is not right? Where are these two voices coming from? Which one is right? Can you feel in your heart which is right?
Are those feelings abstract? We have these general ideas of morality be they the 7 deadly sins or otherwise these come from the external. Do we not have within our nature to do no harm? Can it be argued that these morals or these deadly sins all stem from this aspect of our nature?
We can call this aspect the moral aspect could we not? We could call it anything at all really and nothing changes but perhaps our conceptual perspective.
It is the same for meaning is it not? We can operate within the guidance of this principle if you like or do no harm and never think about it. Because we don't think about it meaning becomes a completely unnecesary idea doesn't it. What does meaning have to do with the practical business of living in accordance to our nature? The mind wants to conceptualize and so calls it meaning. With or without this thing we call meaning the principle still operates does it not? Deciding that it has no meaning would be ridiculous and meaningless wouldn't it. Just becasue the mind fails in it's conceptualization doesn't negate existence. The mind is a reflection of existence and not the source and authority on existence. To believe that because the mind cannot find meaning within the parameters that it considers real or true would be a fallacy. Are you not suggesting that because the mind cannot figure out or conceptualize a thing that it does not exist outside of that framework?
Conceptualized life is a representation of life with a unique perspective. There are infinite perspectives. The mind mirrors life. It is not the source of the light. The mind has limitations but the light does not. So because we cannot fit the infinite light into the limited framework of the conceptual mind we cannot say it doesn't exist. You cannot prove this non existence or existence but perhaps the reflection is evidence. Not the content but the ability to reflect at all.
It is the ego as a reflection that can build this idea and so carry on with it's illusions. Within it's hall of mirrors anything is possible and anything can be true but it is only so within the limited framework. In this the mind becomes a fragment of the whole in perceptual terms. Since it cannot be so in reality we can safely say that it is illusion. How can absolute truths be concevied within the limited framework of a conceptual illusory world of ego?
What you are really saying is if one conceptual paradigm (the existence of God) is negated than all conceptual ideas that flow from that paradigm are negated. We are assuming that the hearts message of do no harm is dependent upon the concept of morality aren't we? The first message is found within the thinking mind and the second has it's source in the living heart.
whether you call it morality or something else it is not dependent on ideas of a conceptual God. One does not negate the other. Of course you are free to "think" otherwise but that changes nothing.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 9 years ago
What are u even saying, there is a value to life and an objective.
we are here so we can follow the word of god walk staright to him, to gosspil the word of god, so at the end we can have internity with god and have our names in the book of life, read the bible go to church.the bible says that when the coming of jesus would be near and come for its people there would be more destruction more hurricanes, earthquakes never reported before war, and arent we seeing this with gadafi, eartquake in virginia in alaska never seen before, more hurricane irene and the other two that are on the sight so dont say that god doesnt exist...you wouldnt want to stay behind trust me that when god comes for its people they would dissapear and at the morning people would be missing and what would people say " it was the alians the ufo" they would be mindwashed cause of all the movies and the creativity of ufo existing, so they wouldnt beleive that it was the coming of god, and after that there would be 3 1/2 years of PEACE and 3 1/2 years of destruction the antichrist will preveal once the good guy giving those 3 1/2 years of piece is now wanting power and destroying everything and putting marks in the hand or forehead so people can buy food because with out it they wont get nothing, and he also would know once having that mark god would never come for you, jesus last coming would be at the end of those seven years god would come with an army and destroy the antichrist and satan those who didnt received the mark and let them self killed by the antichrist would also have a spot to iternity so he does exist and it would be soon when we see him
- Anonymous9 years ago
Life is without objective meaning, insofar as there is no universal meaning behind life. The value and purpose of life is in living it and experiencing it. Morality DOES inherently exist through common sense and conscience interred within every rational human beings. Things that are bad for the species or the individual, though often subjective, are universal in terms of things like murder or rape. If you claim morals do not inherently exist, then you claim that all animals should be killing one another and causing chaos and destruction, and yet, with the exception of species like the Black Widow, this does not happen. A rational human being does not do things that will do great harm to the individual or to the group.
- adagio58Lv 79 years ago
Your error in thinking is that you have not understood "What is God?" and then you can hypothesize.
God the Cosmic Being is all Power (Love), Knowledge and Wisdom, and is Everpresent - the Cosmic Consciousness is Infinite, and there is no 'outside' because ALL IS GOD.
God is Life, God is Love, God is all there is! Absolute, First Cause. The rest is relative.
Morality is based on ethics and is changeful; what was acceptable long ago is not condoned in our time. Morals, to have any value, need to be based on LOVE as a guiding light in all we do. That is why the Master Jesus emphasized love for God and mankind - compassion, kindness, goodwill, etc.
- 9 years ago
- God doesn't exist, and yet life does have meaning, purpose, and intrinsic value. And morality exists. So your statement isn't true.
Was this supposed to be a hard question?
- Irv SLv 79 years ago
While enough general agreement exists among humans to give an appearance
of 'objective' meanings/values in the areas you mention technically.
'meaning' and 'morals' are subjective.
Now, Evren if God does exist, that subjectivity still applies.
It's just that He defines the things accorcing to His subjective opinion.
- FsdLv 59 years ago
well if you look at all of the patterns in the universe and life and society and common sense as being "god", then yes, there is a god, and god is makes up the very fiber of the univers, so there would be nothing